Talk:Tableware/Archives/2016

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge... Gmcbjames (talk) 20:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

---

<discussion> I propose that Dishware be merged into Tableware. I think that the content in the Dishware article can easily be explained in the context of Tableware, and the Tableware article is of a reasonable size in which the merging of Dishware will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned.Gmcbjames (talk) 03:32, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Though this isn't the most important issue I am dealing with on Wikipedia right now, I am not convinced that this is a good idea. I see tableware as a broad topic that would include a brief overview of all the nonconsumable items used in serving and eating meals. Then, we ought to have separate articles on dishware, silverware, glassware, table linens, salt and pepper shakers, cake servers, chop sticks and on and on. I am not saying that these are the exact article titles. Instead, I am speaking conceptually. To me, this seems a logical hierarchy, aand I see no benefit in merging dishware with the underdeveloped tableware article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:05, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to add your comments, I very much appreciate your comments as I wasn't looking forward to a move without some sort of discussion. Wiki does have separate articles on glassware, silverware, salt & peppers etc. With the exception of glassware, flatware (silverware), most other tableware articles are barely stubs with editing problems and some should be deleted for various reasons.

Dishware is not a universal term used either in Britain or in the US. I have never heard of the term dishware until finding it on Wikipedia. Dishware is very limited as the word is defined as crockery (a term used in Britain for pottery used for dining). Crockery is defined as "pottery." In the US, we use the word "dishes" or "china" to refer to the pottery (ceramics) used for dining. Dishware is defined as "the plural of dish" or then again the plural for "dish" is "dishes." Dishes is used as a term to refer to the different types of food served. Dishware is not a term used either in the US or Britain to refer to the pottery used for dining. Dish, dishes, and dishware are pottery items which exclude all other types of materials used for dining.

The common term for dishes or china for the table in the US and Britain is dinnerware. Most retailers sell "dinnerware" - as on the web, Wedgwood's product line includes dinnerware. Dinnerware could be an option for a move. However, dinnerware like tableware is sometimes used as a term to include glassware and flatware. Dinnerware often is used as a term for more formal tableware such as china, rather than plastics etc.

Which brings me back to tableware. Tableware is the dishes (pottery), dinnerware (ceramics and other materials), or china (porcelain) used for dining. Tableware can be meant to include the glassware and flatware used for dining. Tableware is a more global term. Global retailers today refer to tableware, dishes, dinnerware, glassware, and flatware as "Tabletop." BTW: tableware and dinnerware does not include table linens, though "tabletop" does.

The article Tableware would include glassware & flatware as sections with "see main article tags" - as these articles are too large to integrate and would have moved onto articles themselves anyway. Plates and bowls are large articles and would not be merged. Tableware items with stub articles would be eventually merged after consensus- i.e. Sugar bowl (dishware) or else they would also tagged as "see main article." Eventually if the tableware item grows to the point of needing it's own article then it can then be moved with a "see main article" tag applied, otherwise it can stay on the tableware page. Stubs could be merged, and tableware items can grow to eventually have articles themselves.

Tableware is a more global term - see worldwide view, includes different types of materials, and is more inclusive than the terms dinnerware, dishes, or dishware.

So there is my thoughts Gmcbjames (talk) 04:20, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

There are several good reasons to merge Dishware to Tableware which are in line with Wikipedia policy at wp:merge which states:

1. Duplicate – There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject and having the same scope.
2. Overlap – There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap. Wikipedia is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on Flammability.
3. Text – If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. For instance, parents or children of a celebrity who are otherwise unremarkable are generally covered in a section of the article on the celebrity, and can be merged there.
4. Context – If a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it. For instance, minor characters from works of fiction are generally covered in a "List of characters in <work>", and can be merged there; see also WP:FICT.

Merging should be avoided if

1. The resulting article is too long or "clunky" - not a problem as one is a stub and the other is short.
2. The separate topics could be expanded into longer standalone (but cross linked) articles - hasn't happened yet due to their limitations and duplicative information.
3. The topics are discrete subjects and deserve their own articles even though they may be short. - all are "ware," tableware, dishware, and dinnerware.

The existence of two articles, one for dishware and one for tableware is like having two articles for cellphone and mobile phone (they are merged). I think a read of Wikipedia:Systemic bias would also inform this merger discussion. Gmcbjames (talk) 21:33, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Although Wikipedia is not a dictionary, here are the definations of dishware, dinneware, and tableware to take into consideration regarding global and an inclusive topic - as defined by the Merriam Webster Dictionary:

Definition of DISHWARE

tableware (as of china) used in serving food

chiefly US: plates, bowls, cups, etc., that are usually part of a set

First Known Use of DISHWARE 1946

Definition of DINNERWARE

tableware other than flatware

chiefly US, plates, bowls, glasses, etc., that are used for serving and eating dinner

First Known Use of DINNERWARE 1895

Synonyms: tableware

Definition of TABLEWARE

utensils (as of china, glass, or silver) for table use

dishes, glasses, knives, forks, etc., that are used for serving and eating food at a table

First Known Use of TABLEWARE 1766

Synonyms: flatware, silver, silverware

Gmcbjames (talk) 22:32, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and sign your vote with ~~~~

Discussion can be continued and is encouraged. Remember: Wikipedia decisions are not made by popular vote, but rather through discussions by reasonable people working towards consensus. Polling is only meant to facilitate discussion. WP:VOTE Gmcbjames (talk) 02:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Tableware, as a topic, is inclusive of different types of materials other than pottery, is not a term used only in the United States, has been in use since the 1700s, and covers the same subject and scope as Dishware - Tableware and Dishware should be merged.

• Support Your analysis has convinced me, Gmcbjames. I trust your expertise here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:10, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

History? Manufacturaring

This article is a manual on table serving — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.56.158.90 (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Picture with lead: Formal dining table laid for a large private dinner party at Chatsworth House

Is this picture backwards? The knives are on the left and the forks (most of them) on the right, which is backwards from tradition. Western people eat with a knife in the right hand and a fork in the left. (There are differences when only a fork is being held.) Some of the people in paintings and statues are using their left arms more actively than their right arms. My guess is that it was digitally flipped over, or the negative was reproduced up side down at some time.

No, it has not been altered or flipped. The forks are on the left for each person, the knives are on the right and the table napkins are set in the centre of each place setting (between the knives and forks). There is also a soup spoon on the right outside the knives to be used before them. The wine and water glasses are set for the right hand above the knives. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 05:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)